Well, I don't. I don't know that time is unidirectional. That is, I don't know that time is moving in one direction. In fact, I don't think that time is moving at all. The wind moves in one direction. The water in a river moves in one direction. The earth moves around the sun in one direction. All these things have one thing in common: they are physical. Time is not. Thus it cannot move. It is itself movement. In the sense that it represents movement and change.We all know it. Time is unidirectional — EugeneW
Well, not me. I don't know that time is unidirectional. That is, I don't know that time is moving in one direction.
I don't think time is flowing either, and it is not motion. Motion is not time. Motion is just motion. — Corvus
Well, I don't. I don't know that time is unidirectional — Alkis Piskas
The unidirectionality of time is an illusion. It is we who have assigned this quality time. After of course having created the concept of time itself. Time itself does not exist. — Alkis Piskas
Yes, but the motion was periodic in time too. Virtual particles can be represented, if not coupled to real particles yet, as a closed propagator line in space time, or energy momentum diagram. A vacuum bubble is just a single particle rotating in spacetime (so not a particle-antiparticle pair). — Hillary
I didn't say only that, did I? I also said that time does not move at all. My whole point was that!Well, I don't. I don't know that time is unidirectional.
— Alkis Piskas
Don't you think time goes forward only? — Hillary
I don't know about these persons. And good for them if they believe that "time is fundamentally unidirectional". (BTW, does "fundamentally" mean that it can also be otherwise?)Not according to Ilya Prigogine or Lee Smolen. For them time is fundamentally unidirectional.. — Joshs
I didn't say that we have created time. That would be totally ridiculous. I talked about the concept of time. In fact, in bold letters. I couldn't stress it more ...We didnt create time, although we create various theories about time. — Joshs
We are not "attempting" to measure. We are measuring them. Time is just a dimension. As is length. They do not actually exst.The things we are attempting to measure are in themselves incoherent without the prior being of time. — Joshs
I didn't say only that, did I? I also said that time does not move at all. My whole point was that! — Alkis Piskas
I didn't say that we have created time. That would be totally ridiculous. I talked about the concept of time. In fact, in bold letters. I couldn't stress it more ...
The things we are attempting to measure are in themselves incoherent without the prior being of time.
— Joshs
We are not "attempting" to measure. We are measuring them. Time is just a dimension. As is length. They do not actually exst. — Alkis Piskas
But to philosophers like Bergson and the phenomenologists it is the structure of reality itself. — Joshs
Isn't a clock moving? Isn't a pendulum going to and fro periodically? Can't you move the pendulum? Doesn't the pendulum have double motion even?
"Stationary" means "not moving". The possibility of moving is implied. Water can be stationary. A statue is stationary. Inflation can be stationary. They can all move but they don't.There are only irreversible particle processes. Don't they move in a stationary time? — Hillary
What is it that is measured by the clock? If the periodic clock process has completed x periods, then what corresponds this x to? And what if time proceeds in steps, then how does the process know when a static scene has to progress to the next? How does it know it takes a Planck time? — Hillary
I can physics babble as well as anyone here if I put my mind to it. — jgill
These objects which "represent" time are related to the move of sun, not to the motion of time. This is why the first clock ever created was in Ancient Egypt and this specific clock was connected to the variation of light from the sun.
The "heliacal rising" of Sirius means the morning (and the Egyptian day began at dawn) on which the star Sirius can first be seen in the eastern sky right before sunrise. This was to the Egyptians the astronomical beginning of the year, though the actual heliacal rising moved through the Egyptian calendar, since the Egyptian calendar year was 365 days long with no leap day. — javi2541997
Not according to Ilya Prigogine or Lee Smolen. For them time is fundamentally unidirectional..
— Joshs
I don't know about these persons. And good for them if they believe that "time is fundamentally unidirectional". (BTW, does "fundamentally" mean that it can also be otherwise?) — Alkis Piskas
Stationary" means "not moving". The possibility of moving is implied. Water can be stationary. A statue is stationary. Inflation can be stationary. They can all move but they don't.
Time cannot be stationary because it not something that can actually move. Only figuratively, e.g. "times flies", "time passes by", "time has topped" ... — Alkis Piskas
Husserl, Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze and Bergson have shown in different ways that a quantifiable, mathematizable nature presupposes the kind of time which consists of self-presences transitioning from future to present to past in sequential movement (existing ‘in' time). — Joshs
A clock-time calculation counts identical instances of a meaning whose sense is kept fixed during the counting . To count is to count continuously changing instances OF something that holds itself as self-identical through a duration or extension. — Joshs
In deterministic physics, all processes are time-reversible, meaning that they can proceed backward as well as forward through time — Joshs
It could have been such that the universe started in reverse at infinity. But it didn't. — Hillary
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.